Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22972115›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Interposition vein cuff for infragenicular prosthetic bypass graft.

Ahmed A M Khalil, Alan Boyd, Gareth Griffiths

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Tissue-Engineered Vascular Graft-Past, Present, and Future.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2016
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ahmed A M KhalilPerth Royal Infirmary, Perth, UK. a.khalil@nhs.net.
Alan Boyd
Gareth Griffiths
Perth Royal Infirmary · GBNinewells Hospital · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/788
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of prosthetic grafts such as polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE) or Dacron to bypass occluded arteries in the lower leg is an accepted practice in the absence of suitable autologous vein. The aim is limb salvage or functional improvement in critical limb ischaemia, but patency rates for below knee prosthetic bypasses are low. Creating a vein cuff at the distal anastomosis is thought to improve outcomes. Other techniques including the use of pre-cuffed synthetic grafts, spliced segments of vein and the creation of an arterio-venous fistula (AVF) are also used to improve patency.

objectivesTo compare the beneficial effects of using vein cuffed prosthetic grafts for below knee bypass in critical limb ischaemia with other types of reconstruction. SEARCH

methodsThe Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched May 2012) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 5) for publications comparing prosthetic infragenicular bypass using vein cuffs with other bypass techniques. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing interposition vein cuff prosthetic graft with autologous vein graft and non-cuffed prosthetic graft for infragenicular bypass in patients with critical limb ischaemia were included. Trials comparing vein cuff prosthetic grafts with or without AVF and vein cuff prosthetic grafts with pre-cuffed prosthetic grafts were also included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The trials were selected and assessed independently by two review authors. MAIN

resultsSix trials with a combined total of 885 patients were included in this review. Only studies using prosthetic PTFE grafts were identified.Two trials compared PTFE graft with or without a vein cuff. In one underpowered trial for below knee bypass the cumulative primary patency rate was statistically significantly higher in the vein cuff group (80.3% versus 65.3% at 12 months and 51.8% versus 29.1% at 24 months, P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in secondary patency (82.9% versus 72.5% and 58.6% versus 34.9%, P = 0.14) and limb salvage rates (86.3% versus 71.8% and 82.6% versus 62.2%, P = 0.08) at 12 and 24 months respectively. The other trial showed no statistically significant difference between the groups at three years in the below knee femoro-popliteal bypasses (primary patency rate 26% (95% confidence interval (CI) 18 to 38) and 43% (95% CI 33 to 58), secondary patency rate 32% (95% CI 23 to 44) and 42% (95% CI 31 to 56) and limb salvage rate 64% (95% CI 54 to 75) and 61% (95% CI 50 to 74) in the collar and no collar groups respectively). In the femoro-distal bypass group, the differences in primary patency, secondary patency and limb salvage rates were also not statistically significant at three years (primary patency rate 20% (95% CI 11 to 38) and 17% (95% CI 9 to 33), secondary patency rate 22% (95% CI 12 to 39) and 20% (95% CI 11 to 35) and limb salvage rate 59% (95% CI 46 to 76) and 44% (95% CI 32 to 61) in the collar and no collar groups respectively).One trial compared pre-cuffed PTFE grafts with vein cuffed grafts. There was no statistically significant difference in primary patency rate (62% pre-cuffed PTFE versus 52% vein cuff PTFE and 49% versus 44%, P = 0.53), secondary patency rate (66% pre-cuffed PTFE versus 53% vein cuff PTFE and 55% versus 50%, P = 0.30) or limb salvage rate (75% pre-cuffed PTFE versus 72% vein cuff PTFE and 62% versus 65%, P = 0.88) at 12 and 24 months respectively.One trial compared spliced vein grafts with vein cuffed PTFE grafts. At 24 months, the secondary patency rate was statistically significantly higher in the spliced vein group (86% in the spliced vein and 52% in the vein cuff group, P < 0.05). There was no statistical significant difference in primary patency rate (44% versus 50%, P > 0.05) and limb salvage rate (94% versus 85%, P > 0.05).Two trials compared vein cuff PTFE grafts with and without AVF. There was no statistical significant difference at 24 months in primary patency rate (29% versus 36%, P = 0.77; 32% versus 28%, P = 0.2), secondary patency rate (40% versus 40%, P = 0.89; 28% versus 24%, P = 0.2) and limb salvage rate (65% versus 70%, P = 0.97; 62% versus 71%, P = 0.3). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is evidence that a vein cuff at the distal anastomosis site improves primary graft patency rates for below knee PTFE graft, but this does not reduce the risk of limb loss. Pre-cuffed PTFE grafts have comparable patency and limb salvage rates to vein cuff PTFE grafts. The use of spliced veins improved secondary patency but this did not translate into improved limb salvage. The use of an AVF alone showed no added benefits. Evidence for a beneficial effect of vein cuffed PTFE grafts is weak and based on underpowered trials. A large study with a specific focus on below knee vein cuff prosthetic grafts, including PTFE, is required.

Indexed as

Blood Vessel ProsthesisBlood Vessel Prosthesis ImplantationHumansIschemiaLegLimb SalvageProsthesis DesignRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVascular Patency

Identifiers

PMID22972115
PMCPMC11569884
OpenAlexW1919571026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.